If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I tried gnome 3 the other day for the first time, in virtualbox, and I gotta say I don't hate it. It isn't my cup of tea and I find it relatively slow to work with on a desktop but I think it makes a very nice tablet DE. What bothers me most about it is how it seems to be equally as restricting as a jailbroken iOS, and I don't like how fallback mode is now removed. I also think shading should be enabled by default, since you can't minimize anything.

However, considering GNOME 3's hardware demands and the fact it isn't practical outside of casual PC/tablet usage, I do not think it should qualify as the linux default anymore. I strongly feel XFCE should take the new title of linux default, considering how balanced it is in usability, performance, compatibility, and features.

I think the reason GNOME 3 is hated so much is because it isn't really GNOME anymore, just as how Windows 8 doesn't feel like Windows anymore. I'm sure there'd be a lot less hate for GNOME 3 if it had a completely different name, and if it didn't lack so many features that even Windows 95 would have.

Comment

Gnome 3.8. The version at which gnome died. Since there is no more fallback gnome will see another decline in user numbers.

I'm not sure if there would be a decline. I don't see the appeal of Gnome 3 without using it's standard interface, otherwise you might as well use XFCE or Cinnamon where you get basically the same experience but with more customization. Besides, it isn't necessarily a bad thing that gnome is removing fallback mode because it helps get people with the ancient crappy hardware to move on. As I see it, pretty much any 64 bit compatible (x86) system should be capable of running GNOME 3 just fine, with the exception of VIA users. You could argue that fallback mode would be necessary if your GPU drivers fail, but IIRC, LLVM is supposed to be a quick temporary fix for that. When I tried GNOME 3 I didn't have the GPU drivers installed and it was running relatively smooth; it was usable, I'll put it that way.

Comment

A few hours ago I gave Gnome 3 another spin... and now I'm back to KDE.

The performance of Gnome 3 is unacceptable on my Laptop, it kind of "lags" when moving windows (enough to consider it a nuisance). Gnome "classic" seemed to have the same problem, and it felt very very incomplete to me.

Comment

A few hours ago I gave Gnome 3 another spin... and now I'm back to KDE.

The performance of Gnome 3 is unacceptable on my Laptop, it kind of "lags" when moving windows (enough to consider it a nuisance). Gnome "classic" seemed to have the same problem, and it felt very very incomplete to me.

Is Gnome "classic" fallback mode?

There's no longer a 2d "fallback mode". In gnome 3.8, "gnome classic" is gnome-shell with a more "classic" gnome2-like layout, but its still gnome-shell and needs 3d acceleration.

Comment

I hope there will be a way to easily install Gnome 3.8 on Fedora before Fedora 19 gets released...

Are you having problems installing gnome on fedora now? Fedora is actually where I tried it out earlier this week and I didn't get any problems. It took a really long time to install but it was successful.

Comment

It depends. Mutter tries to do fancy shit with VSync, and fails at it with some proprietary drivers. Mostly on AMD hardware, but I've seen it happen on Nvidia as well. When things aren't working right, everything feels all "floaty" like your iterations are a few frames behind your actual inputs. It's pretty easy to fix though.

That aside, the one thing that can be said for the Gnome team (and their cousins working on Cinnamon and Pantheon) is that they know how to design a good looking system. I use and love Dynamic Activities, which is one of the main reasons I don't really like KDE, Unity, or Xfce. Unity isn't an option for me (I use Arch) and Xfce doesn't have the nice features of Gnome, at least not with Gnome's elegance (system settings, applications search, overview, etc). KDE (like Enlightenment) is very ugly IMO. Way too many slow and "shiny" effects everywhere, tons of inconsistent multi-colored icons all over, etc. I don't like everything about Gnome's design, but they at least understand how to use Minimalisn, Whitespace, and Consistency.

Most peoples complaints about Gnome are due to missing features (like no "taskbar"), but most, if not all, of those are fixable with Extensions (like "Dash to Dock"). Granted I do agree they sometimes go a bit overboard, and I do think they should build in some more advanced default settings to enable the most commonly requested features (again, like the missing taskbar, and natulius features). That said, I've installed stock Gnome Shell on both my Mother and Grandmother's machines, and both of them didn't have any problems understanding how to use the system. Indeed, gnome's design kept there computers much cleaner (no desktop icons everywhere confusing them, no way to fudge up system settings, etc). They understood how to change basic settings cause Gnome's settings area is so basic, and they instantly understood how to access apps and switch windows. They even really liked the overview area as a way to get to their "background" windows (over the "listed on taskbar" concept Windows 7 uses) cause it makes visual sense when you see all the windows zoom out.